Pieter Van Dyck

In 2010, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) created a set of common data elements (CDEs) to help standardize the assessment and reporting of imaging findings in traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, as opposed to other standardized radiology reporting systems, a visual overview and data to support the proposed standardized lexicon are lacking. We used over 4000 admission computed tomography (CT) scans of patients with TBI from the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study to develop an extensive pictorial overview of the NINDS TBI CDEs, with visual examples and background information on individual pathoanatomical lesion types, up to the level of supplemental and emerging information (e.g., location and estimated volumes). We documented the frequency of lesion occurrence, aiming to quantify the relative importance of different CDEs for characterizing TBI, and performed a critical appraisal of our experience with the intent to inform updating of the CDEs. In addition, we investigated the co-occurrence and clustering of lesion types and the distribution of six CT classification systems. The median age of the 4087 patients in our dataset was 50 years (interquartile range, 29-66; range, 0-96), including 238 patients under 18 years old (5.8%). Traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (45.3%), skull fractures (37.4%), contusions (31.3%), and acute subdural hematoma (28.9%) were the most frequently occurring CT findings in acute TBI. The ranking of these lesions was the same in patients with mild TBI (baseline Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score 13-15) compared with those with moderate-severe TBI (baseline GCS score 3-12), but the frequency of occurrence was up to three times higher in moderate-severe TBI. In most TBI patients with CT abnormalities, there was co-occurrence and clustering of different lesion types, with significant differences between mild and moderate-severe TBI patients. More specifically, lesion patterns were more complex in moderate-severe TBI patients, with more co-existing lesions and more frequent signs of mass effect. These patients also had higher and more heterogeneous CT score distributions, associated with worse predicted outcomes. The critical appraisal of the NINDS CDEs was highly positive, but revealed that full assessment can be time consuming, that some CDEs had very low frequencies, and identified a few redundancies and ambiguity in some definitions. Whilst primarily developed for research, implementation of CDE templates for use in clinical practice is advocated, but this will require development of an abbreviated version. In conclusion, with this study, we provide an educational resource for clinicians and researchers to help assess, characterize, and report the vast and complex spectrum of imaging findings in patients with TBI. Our data provides a comprehensive overview of the contemporary landscape of TBI imaging pathology in Europe, and the findings can serve as empirical evidence for updating the current NINDS radiologic CDEs to version 3.0.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of a multicontrast deep learning (DL)–reconstructed 4-fold accelerated 2-dimensional (2D) turbo spin echo (TSE) protocol and the feasibility of 3-dimensional (3D) superresolution reconstruction (SRR) of DL-enhanced 6-fold accelerated 2D Dixon TSE magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for comprehensive knee joint assessment, by comparing image quality and diagnostic performance with a conventional 2-fold accelerated 2D TSE knee MRI protocol. Materials and Methods: This prospective, ethics-approved study included 19 symptomatic adult subjects who underwent knee MRI on a clinical 3 T scanner. Every subject was scanned with 3 DL-enhanced acquisition protocols in a single session: a clinical standard 2-fold in-plane parallel imaging (PI) accelerated 2D TSE-based protocol (5 sequences, 11 minutes 23 seconds) that served as a reference, a DL-reconstructed 4-fold accelerated 2D TSE protocol combining 2-fold PI and 2-fold simultaneous multislice acceleration (5 sequences, 6 minutes 24 seconds), and a 3D SRR protocol based on DL-enhanced 6-fold accelerated (ie, 3-fold PI and 2-fold simultaneous multislice) 2D Dixon TSE MRI (6 anisotropic 2D Dixon TSE acquisitions rotated around the phase-encoding axis, 6 minutes 24 seconds). This resulted in a total of 228 knee MRI scans comprising 21,204 images. Three readers evaluated all pseudonymized and randomized images in terms of image quality using a 5-point Likert scale. Two of the readers (musculoskeletal radiologists) additionally evaluated anatomical visibility and diagnostic confidence to assess normal and pathological knee structures with a 5-point Likert scale. They recorded the presence and location of internal knee derangements, including cartilage defects, meniscal tears, tears of ligaments, tendons and muscles, and bone injuries. The statistical analysis included nonparametric Friedman tests, and interreader and intrareader agreement assessment using the weighted Fleiss-Cohen kappa (κ) statistic. P values of less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The evaluated DL-enhanced 4-fold accelerated 2D TSE protocol provided very similar image quality and anatomical visibility to the standard 2D TSE protocol, whereas the 3D SRR Dixon TSE protocol scored less in terms of overall image quality due to reduced edge sharpness and the presence of artifacts (P < 0.001). Subjective signal-to-noise ratio, contrast resolution, fluid brightness, and fat suppression were good to excellent for all protocols. For 1 reader, the Dixon method of the 3D SRR protocol provided significantly better fat suppression than the spectral fat saturation applied in the standard 2D TSE protocol (P < 0.05). The visualization of knee structures with 3D SRR Dixon TSE was very similar to the standard protocol, except for cartilage, tendons, and bone, which were affected by the presence of reconstruction and aliasing artifacts (P < 0.001). The diagnostic confidence of both readers was high for all protocols and all knee structures, except for cartilage and tendons. The standard 2D TSE protocol showed a significantly higher diagnostic confidence for assessing tendons than 3D SRR Dixon TSE MRI (P < 0.01). The interreader and intrareader agreement for the assessment of internal knee derangements using any of the 3 protocols was substantial to almost perfect (κ = 0.67–1.00). For cartilage, the interreader agreement was substantial for DL-enhanced accelerated 2D TSE (κ = 0.79) and almost perfect for standard 2D TSE (κ = 0.98) and 3D SRR Dixon TSE (κ = 0.87). For menisci, the interreader agreement was substantial for 3D SRR Dixon TSE (κ = 0.70–0.80) and substantial to almost perfect for standard 2D TSE (κ = 0.80–0.99) and DL-enhanced 2D TSE (κ = 0.87–1.00). Moreover, the total acquisition time was reduced by 44% when using the DL-enhanced accelerated 2D TSE or 3D SRR Dixon TSE protocol instead of the conventional 2D TSE protocol. Conclusions: The presented DL-enhanced 4-fold accelerated 2D TSE protocol provides image quality and diagnostic performance similar to the standard 2D protocol. Moreover, the 3D SRR of DL-enhanced 6-fold accelerated 2D Dixon TSE MRI is feasible for multicontrast 3D knee MRI as its diagnostic performance is comparable to standard 2-fold accelerated 2D knee MRI. However, reconstruction and aliasing artifacts need to be further addressed to guarantee a more reliable visualization and assessment of cartilage, tendons, and bone. Both the 2D and 3D SRR DL-enhanced protocols enable a 44% faster examination compared with conventional 2-fold accelerated routine 2D TSE knee MRI and thus open new paths for more efficient clinical 2D and 3D knee MRI.

Numerous studies have assessed the performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detecting tears of the knee menisci using arthroscopy results as the gold standard, but few have concentrated on the nature of discordant findings. The purpose of this study was to analyze the discordances between 3T MRI and arthroscopic evaluation of the knee meniscus. Medical records of 112 patients who underwent 3T MRI and subsequent arthroscopy of the knee were retrospectively analyzed to determine the accuracy of diagnoses of meniscal tear. Compared with arthroscopy, there were 22 false-negative and 14 false-positive MR interpretations of meniscal tear occurring in 32 patients. Images with errors in diagnosis were retrospectively reviewed by two musculoskeletal radiologists in consensus and all errors were categorized as either unavoidable, equivocal or as interpretation error. Of 36 MR diagnostic errors, there were 16 (44%) unavoidable, 5 (14%) interpretation errors and 15 (42%) equivocal for meniscal tear. The largest categories of errors were unavoidable false-positive MRI diagnoses (71%) and equivocal false-negative MRI diagnoses (50%). All meniscal tears missed by MRI were treated with partial meniscectomy (n = 14) or meniscal repair (n = 8). Discordant findings between 3T MRI and arthroscopic evaluation of the knee meniscus remain a concern and primarily occur due to unavoidable and equivocal errors. Clinicians involved in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with meniscal tears should understand why and how the findings seen on knee MRI and arthroscopy may sometimes differ.

Background: The current gold standard for the treatment of an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is reconstruction with tendon graft. Recently, two surgical ACL repair techniques have been developed for treating an acute ACL rupture: Dynamic Intraligamentary Stabilization (DIS, Ligamys®) and Internal Brace Ligament Augmentation (IBLA,InternalBrace™). We will conduct a single-blind, multi-center, randomized controlled trial which compares DIS, IBLA and reconstruction for relative clinical efficacy and economic benefit.Methods: Subjects, aged 18–50 years, with a proximal, primary and repairable ACL rupture will be included. DIS is preferably performed within 4 weeks post-rupture, IBLA within 12 weeks and reconstruction after 4 weeks post-rupture. Patients are included in study 1 if they present within 0–4 weeks post-rupture and surgery is feasible within 4 weeks post-rupture. Patients of study 1 will be randomized to either DIS or IBLA. Patients are included in study 2 if they present after 4 weeks post-rupture and surgery is feasible between 5 and 12 weeks post-rupture. Patients of study 2 will be randomized to either IBLA or reconstruction. A total of 96 patients will be included, with 48 patients per study and 24 patients per study arm. Patients will be followed-up for 2 years. The primary outcome is change from baseline (pre-rupture) in International Knee Documentation Committee score to 6 months post-operatively. The main secondary outcomes are the EQ-5D-5 L, Tegner score, Lysholm score, Lachman test, isokinetic and proprioceptive measurements, magnetic resonance imaging outcome, return to work and sports, and re-rupture/failure rates. The statistical analysis will be based on the intention-to-treat principle. The economic impact of the surgery techniques will be evaluated by the cost-utility analysis. The LIBRƎ study is to be conducted between 2018 and 2022.Discussion: This LIBRƎ study protocol is the first study to compare DIS, IBLA and ACL reconstruction for relative clinical efficacy and economic benefit. The outcomes of this study will provide data which could aid orthopaedic surgeons to choose between the different treatment options for the surgical treatment of an acute ACL rupture.Trial registration: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov;NCT03441295. Date registered 13.02.2018.

Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) signal intensity (SI) measurements are being used increasingly in both clinical and research studies to assess the maturity of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) grafts in humans. However, SI in conventional MRI with weighted images is a nonquantitative measure dependent on hardware and software. Purpose: To conduct a systematic review of studies that have used MRI SI as a proxy for ACL graft maturity and to identify potential confounding factors in assessing the ACL graft in conventional MRI studies. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review was conducted by searching the MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library electronic databases according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to identify studies that examined the healing of the intra-articular portion of the ACL graft by assessing SI on MRIs. Results: A total of 34 studies were selected for inclusion in this systematic review. The MRI acquisition techniques and methods to evaluate the ACL graft SI differed greatly across the studies. No agreement was found regarding the time frames of SI changes in MRI reflecting normal healing of the ACL tendon graft, and the graft SI and clinical outcomes after ACL reconstruction were found to be poorly correlated. Conclusion: The MRI acquisition and evaluation methods used to assess ACL grafts are very heterogeneous, impeding comparisons of SI between successive scans and between independent studies. Therefore, quantitative MRI-based biomarkers of ACL graft healing are greatly needed to guide the appropriate time of returning to sports after ACL reconstruction.

This pictorial review presents an overview of common interpretation errors and pitfalls in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the knee. Instead of being exhaustive, we will emphasize those pitfalls that are most commonly encountered by young residents or less experienced radiologists.